tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post2386043231908821352..comments2024-03-21T01:17:34.038-05:00Comments on Pleasant Family Shopping: A&P Goes to War!Davehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07788722183424550052noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-83540437420781764932011-10-27T09:53:56.942-05:002011-10-27T09:53:56.942-05:00UPDATE: A lot of what you wrote in this post is n...UPDATE: A lot of what you wrote in this post is now part of a new book titled"<br />The Great A&P and the Struggle for Small Business in America by Marc <br />Levinson.<br /><br />I'm into the middle of the book now, the early years of the Big War for the company. Very interesting readingANDY PAGEhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00436351263940733528noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-38247820915405848162009-12-16T21:13:55.212-06:002009-12-16T21:13:55.212-06:00Read this post on Sunday off my Ipod in a greasy B...Read this post on Sunday off my Ipod in a greasy Burger King (Love technology!) but I didn't get a chance to respond until now. In the interest of keeping me wide awake, this was such a well written and interesting post. I actually wanted to know more about the Patman bill. <br /><br />I love the look of the store in the first photo and I, too, miss the World Weekly News and the wacky stories. The other tabloids are so boring. <br /><br />Regarding what SanDiegoDavid said I don't have an issue with the weak dying and the strong surviving, that's what being competitive retail wise is all about. I, personally, do not like how Walmart and others such as Target (which is just as bad) got there. They didn't just compete, they shook down everything to get what they wanted. I don't call that competition fair at all. And what are the choices and the outcomes that we are left with? Nothing but a relative few. I'd rather see the diversification that once was the rule in retail, not the exception then this because it gets tiring to have the same set of choices and nothing more. When it comes down to Christmas shopping and already exhausting the big brand name options, you really want to bang your head against the wall as I certainly have wanted to the last few days.Didihttp://dimbeautyofchicago.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-24573999556568988512009-12-13T13:37:41.485-06:002009-12-13T13:37:41.485-06:00A&P's dominance varied a lot, by market, a...A&P's dominance varied a lot, by market, and so the impact of their anti-competitive activity also would have varied. Although A&P has always been associated with the Northeast, they never had the market dominance of First National in New England or Safeway (and later Safeway and Giant) in DC. They did well in some very competitive markets like Cleveland, where they briefly were the market leader in the mid 60s and had high penetration of city neighborhoods and suburban areas, only to be done in by the revival of Fisher Foods and the continued growth of other local chains. OTOH, they were a second tier operator in other Ohio cities where Kroger and/or local competition like Big Bear or Foodtown created barriers. They also never seriously challenged National and Jewel in Chicago duringthe super market era, although they probably had done better before Jewel's entry in to the grocery business.<br /><br />Wal-Mart's grocery footprint varies, but the impact of their general merchandise business is more pervasive and effects suppliers generally. A&P always maintained a middle brow image and was well-liked for their private label merchandise. Their produce was usually lacking, but their meat was usually competitive. A&P's lack of expansion into fresh food departments and their slower than average adoption of new brand name merchandise were among the factors that harmed them in the 60s and 70s. The conduct of their inhouse manufacturing would have been an issue that will never face wal-Mart.<br /><br />Wal-Mart once was the "anti-K-Mart" and courted a middle brow image, but their aggressive cost cutting eliminated that advantage and made it easy for Target to establish itself as the "anti-Wal-Mart", with Costco even more successfully taking on Sam's from a similar perspective. They've really boxed themsleves into a business model that can't sustain profit growth without new approaches to merchandising or new businesses, plus they're stuck with some underperforming foreign businesses and Sam's Club. It will be interesting to see who they try to squeeze next--I'm guessing it will be lower and middle levels of management.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-10427820650368999902009-12-13T13:23:00.022-06:002009-12-13T13:23:00.022-06:00David – I think the one thing that has staved off ...David – I think the one thing that has staved off the same sort of treatment for Wal-Mart has been the severe economic slowdown of the last couple of years. When things (hopefully) improve, we could well see more governmental focus on Wal-Mart. I know that there are strong opinions on all sides of this issue, but my own view is that “monopolies” tend to fall on their own – look at GM, IBM and of course A&P, all considered impenetrable monopolies in their day. Where those companies are concerned at least, that kind of talk would be laughable today.<br /> <br />And we’re all starved for news on Bat Boy! The Enquirer and Star have “gone respectable” (relatively speaking, of course) and no one’s left to update us! :) <br /> <br />Anonymous – Thanks for the comment! I think the interesting thing here is the fact the A&P’s competitors were also raising the “save free enterprise” argument. The job exodus began long before Wal-Mart was the major force in the market. I can remember watching a 60 Minutes story in 1982 or so, when I had just started college, about the closing of General Electric’s household iron plant in Connecticut (the jobs went to another country, but I can’t remember which one) and thinking what a travesty that was. Sadly, this trend has been underway for a very long time, with no end in sight, and has since spread well beyond the manufacturing sector. Near where I live, there is a very large information services company that is about to outsource hundreds of I.T. development jobs to China, where people with masters’ degrees in computer science earn 10 to 12 grand a year. I think the ultimate culprit is the fact that we’ve become used to a high standard of living for a very low relative cost, and no one I can think of (including myself) is keen on giving that up. It’s fascinating to look at old magazine ads from the 60’s that show prices for TV’s, stereos, etc., and the huge percentage of disposable income people had to fork over for them. No easy answer to this one, I’m afraid!<br /><br />Ken – Excellent points all around! Anti-trust enforcement was far more stringent in years past than it is now, in my opinion. Today, the W-D decision seems extreme to me, and forced selloff of Shopping Bag by Von’s in 1967 just seems wrong.<br /><br />I agree that there would probably be little sympathy on the part of Wal-Mart’s competitors in a similar situation, simply because their share of the market, as you say, is much higher relative to A&P’s back in the day. Also, the “sentimental factor” doesn’t exist. I’m hard pressed to think of any independent discount chain that was started up by grateful former Wal-Mart execs, though I can’t conclusively say there haven’t been any.Davehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07788722183424550052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-32959351700313053462009-12-13T13:05:09.323-06:002009-12-13T13:05:09.323-06:00Relevant to past discussions. Some stores in the p...Relevant to past discussions. Some stores in the pics had coffee grinders at the cash register, some didn't. perhaps, this was a regional office or store size decision for a long time.<br /><br />A&P also must have been experimenting with the number of cash registers. These stores from the 30s and 40s have more registers than was common among many stores they opened a in the 50s and 60s, although these stores were probably the same size or smaller than the ones they opened later. It was not uncommon for an A&P to have perhaps 3 registers, one of which might have been an express. They must have cit back at some point, because the stores from the 30s and 40s that remained in operation often only had 2-3 registers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-78543865835430054052009-12-12T21:24:29.290-06:002009-12-12T21:24:29.290-06:00My thoughts were along the line of the competition...My thoughts were along the line of the competition of A&P supporting A&P's facing anti-trust were primarily that the competition didn't want scrutiny as they were also chains. Kroger and Safeway were already widespread and had extensive manufacturing facilities of their own. National was also drawing some anti-trust notice due to its rapid expansion, which was primarily fueled by acquisitions. Oddly, a little more than a decade later, Winn-Dixie would be supermarket to attract anti-trust attention due to its acquisitions and would be hit with a 10 year moratorium on mergers in 1966.<br /><br />Very few of Walmart's competitors would rally to the company's defense today, given the different retail environment. A&P was better able to appeal to its customers in improving its consumer image than Walmart has so far been able. Even in comparison, A&P's market share was never as high nationally as Walmart has managed to obtain. At the max, current estimates are that A&P never had as much as 25% of the nation's food dollars, though anti-trust advocates made it sound much higher at the time. Even today, Walmart accounts for less than a third of the dollars spent for groceries nationally, and some of the nation's most populous markets still have very little Walmart penetration. But no retailer has been as able to dictate to the manufacturers how they package, market and price their products the way Walmart is able to.Kennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-44059109061557077782009-12-12T09:42:31.031-06:002009-12-12T09:42:31.031-06:00It's funny how businesses fight anti-trust act...It's funny how businesses fight anti-trust action because they're worried about saving "free enterprise". they simply don't want new competition or scrutiny of their own anti-competitive actions.<br /><br />Wal-Mart's low prices have been subsidized through development deals with cities, incentives from states and the rest of us subsidizing the food stamps and medicaid their employees need to survive. They have squeezed suppliers and forced jobs to leave the US. They are hardly the only culprit, but the biggest, most aggressive and most forward moving. Now they're stuck with a merchadising model that can't increase profits in their core business---they drive volume with low margin items with food and derive profits from peripherals like check cashing and wire transfers. Economists who've done the math have noticed that Wal-Mart wouldn't have to raise its prices very much to be less of a burden on the rest of us. Defend them all you want, after all you're subsidizing their business even if you never shop there.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1033289293807518844.post-51718794509107127142009-12-12T09:00:17.805-06:002009-12-12T09:00:17.805-06:00A few observations:
1. What was done to A&P c...A few observations:<br /><br />1. What was done to A&P could easily be done to Wal Mart today, given the current political climate. Never mind that the consumer is benefiting from lower prices, it is important to kill the retail/grocery behemoth. I will never understand that line of thinking. Business evolves, the strong and innovative survive, the weak and complacent die.<br /><br />2. I miss the Weekly World News too, it was one of the most entertaining aspects of my weekly trip to the grocery store. I wonder what Bat Boy is up to these days?SanDiegoDavidnoreply@blogger.com